.32 isn't a self-defense gun?

In a different forum I heard about a murder committed with a .32. At the trial, the killer claimed self-defense. His own home security camera showed otherwise. :embarrasment:

One poster said "a .32 is not a self-defense gun" and he was surprised that the perp managed to kill the victim.

Is a .32 not a self-defense gun? Would it be that hard to kill someone with it, provided you had a good aim?

If you enjoyed reading about ".32 isn't a self-defense gun?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!

repsychler

October 4, 2003, 05:57 PM

If I had a nickel for every buffoon that says "Don't use _____ for self defense, it'll only piss the bad guy off." Oddly enough, none of them have ever taken an offer to be shot with the cartridge. I don't know why not, it'll only make them mad, right?

Is a .32 the ideal round? Heck no. Is it better than nothing? Oh yeah. The .32 in your pocket always beats the .45 at home.

C.R.Sam

October 4, 2003, 06:23 PM

.32 SnW Long was considered a decent cop caliber for many years.
Definately beats a bunch of lesser cartridges.

A biggie is knowin your weapon and how to use it.

Sam

Oracle

October 4, 2003, 06:38 PM

.32 ACP was a police caliber in Europe for a great many years. I certainly wouldn't volunteer to stand in front of one, and some very concealable pistols are made in that caliber today.

Dilettante

October 4, 2003, 07:03 PM

What really is the difference between the effects of these different ammo types? I remember the ".25 kills 'em just as dead" thread from a while back; it sounds like a .25 might take a while to kill someone.
As long as your aim is decent, how much difference is there (really) between .32, .38, 9mm and .45?
(And what makes "magnum" magnum?)

I can sure feel the difference in recoil and frankly, I'd rather carry a gun with less recoil and more concealability. (Remember less recoil = more practice too.)

Snowdog

October 4, 2003, 07:14 PM

I believe most people don't quite understand what folks mean when they say a particular cartridge is less than ideal or inadequate for self defense. All centerfire and most rimfire cartridges have the potential to stop/kill in a defensive situation. However, the larger and more powerful cartridges are much more likely to yield those desired results in a more timely manner.

No doubt hundreds of people have been killed, both accidently and intentionally, by the lowly .22short from small concealable handguns. Would one consider this a promising candidate as a "defensive round" after hearing the details of one such instance?

For all intents and purposes, pencils and other small sharpened wooden objects have killed thousands of people in accendents, murders, et al. Again, after reading of situations where pencils have successfully been used in defense, would it then be wise for one to justify pencils for personal protection?

Damn near anything can be used to kill, including the anemic .32acp. What the question boils down to should be this: "Is the .32acp good enough for me in defensive situations"?

Quartus

October 4, 2003, 07:22 PM

Or to put it another way, "Am I willing to be my life on it when there are plenty of better alternatives available in a very similar size?"

Not me.

Better than nothing? You bet. If I had nothing else, I'd be glad I had a .32 instead of nothing.

But I'm sure not going to make it a choice.

Oracle

October 4, 2003, 07:37 PM

I use a .32 ACP Keltec P-32 when I simply can't conceal anything else. As was said before, it's better than nothing. Do I think it's a completely ineffective caliber? Nope, otherwise I wouldn't carry it.

However, I do carry a caliber that I believe will stop an attacker better when I can do so.

Dilettante

October 4, 2003, 07:41 PM

Please quantify.
What do the hospital records show?
I'm not interested in formulas involving weight, speed and caliber; I want to know about results.

Snowdog

October 4, 2003, 08:02 PM

I'm sure more people have been admitted to hospitals with small caliber GSWs than otherwise(probably because the rest go to the morgue :D kidding), but when it comes to detailed results concerning statistics, you'll more than likely end up doing that yourself as no one here is trying to convince anyone of anything concerning .32acp effectiveness.
The .25acp and .32acp certainly have the capability to kill, but the rest is common sense (ie they are anemic in power when compared to other cartridges available and the overall results will in turn reflect that).

If you feel confident using a .32acp for self defense, that should be good enough; leave it at that.
What the heck does it matter what others think if you feel otherwise. They will only offer their opinions if you ask for it. ;)

Gerald McDonald

October 4, 2003, 08:51 PM

Dilettante, a 22,25 or 32 will kill you stone cold dead. Its that simple. Will it take seconds, minutes, hours or days. Depends on where and how many times your hit, that and if its your time to go a BB will send you to meet your maker.
If someone tells you a 22, 25 or 32 is harmless or anything less than lethal they are a dumbass and it would be in your best interest to find new people to talk to.

larry408

October 4, 2003, 09:26 PM

The next time someone tells you that the 32acp is not a good defense gun, ask them if they would want to be shot with one.

Snowdog

October 4, 2003, 10:26 PM

The next time someone tells you a pellet gun is not a good self defense gun, ask them if they would want to be shot in the eye with one.

The next time someone tells you a pencil is not a good defensive weapon, ask them if they would want to be stabbed with one, etc etc.

I have always failed to grasp this angle that usually turns up in a caliber-effectiveness debate.
The lack of desire to be shot has absolutely no baring on effectiveness; as demonstrated, that can be applied to anything.

No one enjoys pain, that shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.

Dilettante

October 4, 2003, 10:44 PM

(Snowdog)
If you feel confident using a .32acp for self defense, that should be good enough; leave it at that.
What the heck does it matter what others think if you feel otherwise. They will only offer their opinions if you ask for it.

I don't really know what the hell this means, other than "I don't know" combined with "only an idiot would carry a .32". I don't know what's magic about .38 or .357 (or 9mm) that make them acceptable, yet a .32 is "anemic".

OTOH I strongly agree with SD's later point: of course I don't want to be shot with a .32, or stabbed with a knife, or poked with a pin. That doesn't tell me which one is most likely to keep me alive by immediate neutralization of a threat.

Standing Wolf

October 4, 2003, 10:47 PM

Bullet placement, bullet placement, bullet placement.

Once you've got that down tight, you can devote time and effort to caliber quibbles to your heart's content. Personally, I've devoted many thousands of hours over the past three decades to bullet placement, and I still don't have 100% confidence in my ability to hit the exact right spot in almost no time time after time. One of the reasons I pack the .357 magnum is that I know I'm not a paragon of accuracy, so I rely on the mechanical advantage.

Okiecruffler

October 4, 2003, 10:49 PM

If I have to shoot someone, I'm shooting to stop them from harming me, not to kill them (if it happens, "sux to be them"). It will come as little comfort to my family if the BG dies after being able to insert a nasty steel instrument in my rib cage. I carried a little P32 for awhile, and I practiced CNS shots out to 15yrds. I got pretty good, probably about 95% deadcenter hits (that P32 is a really neat shooter), but those other 5% shots worried me. And the range is the range, a dark ally is a dark alley. Tis many a slip 'tween cup and lip and all that rot.

JohnKSa

October 4, 2003, 11:11 PM

Self defense isn't about killing people, it's about stopping them.

Most folks are going to have a change of heart after being shot a few times with a .32 ACP (or pretty much any caliber for that matter.)

The ones that aren't impressed by getting shot a few times are really hard to convince--there have been instances of such people taking multiple .357 rounds and still not ceasing hostilities.

If you want to be sure of immediate stopping power with a single shot, a 12ga shotgun with a full power buckshot load is a pretty good bet. Anything less than that (including a good many rifle calibers) can be surprisingly ineffective under the proper circumstances.

Get a gun that you can and will carry all the time, practice with it a lot, and you're far better off than the guy who has a much "better stopper" but never shoots it because the recoil is punishing and/or the ammo is too expensive, and who leaves it at home when he has to dress a certain way, or when it's too hot to wear a vest, etc.

All this obsessing about cartridge performance is a subconscious attempt to deflect the attention away from the true issues. i.e. Let's focus on the gun and ammo and then we won't have to think about the REALLY important variable in the equation--how much do I practice and how well can I shoot.

1. A person who practices with a "mousegun" will be much more effective than someone who carries the latest and greatest "stopper" but hasn't shot it much.

2. No handguns are guaranteed stoppers. In fact, most handguns are MISERABLE stoppers. You have to step up to long guns before you can really talk about "stopping power."

BlkHawk73

October 4, 2003, 11:11 PM

Too many people that "know" believe themselves and try to convince others that you "need" a particular caliber/cartridge to protect yourself. In most cases it's the based simply on size. (think they're compensating for something?:p ) The .32 was great until something else came along, then it became worthless. When something else came along...see where this is going?:banghead:
It's the same thing as hunters believing they need a 300 Weatherby to hunt whitetail.
Would I use a .32? Sure if need be. I prefer other cartridges but any would suffice. Too all those that claim the tiny undersized cartridges won't do any good...run in front of one and see how it is.:neener:

Snowdog

October 4, 2003, 11:43 PM

Well, it's certainly not my intention to get in a pissing match, though I'll reply.

I don't really know what the hell this means, other than "I don't know" combined with "only an idiot would carry a .32".

"I don't know what the hell this means" ?
First off, there are no hidden messages to the referenced passage to obfuscate the meaning or otherwise confuse. The meaning should be self-evident.

To clarify:
If you personally feel confident using a .32acp for defense, you should neither feel the need to justify your decision nor seek the opinions of others. That's all, nothing more to reflect upon or muddle into obscurity.

For example, on the hottest of days I personally carry an early model P32 in which I've posted several proud pictures of here. During these hot and humid days, it is my primary line of defense.
Though I make no mistake of the .32acp's lack of power, I am also quite aware it will punch a .32 caliber hole in an assailant's face... eight holes if need be.
Since I am confident that several holes in someone's face will in the very least end an attack against me, unsolicited dissenting opinions do not affect me, nor should it you.
You seem confident in the caliber, so what more do you need? Hopefully not the blessing of others. Can anyone glean such a consensus here? Can anyone herd cats?

I don't know what's magic about .38 or .357 (or 9mm) that make them acceptable, yet a .32 is "anemic".

The magic difference: Caliber, weight, velocity and ulitimately energy...the very things you are uninterested in (yet account for the difference in which you seek).

I'm not interested in formulas involving weight, speed and caliber

Gordon

October 4, 2003, 11:53 PM

You don't hear of .32's 'bouncing off skulls' like .25s and .22 out of short barrel. I think that is the whole big difference between .32(acp or longs or magnum) and lesser mouse gun calibers. The "Zebra" and "Zodiac" kiilling were all done with .32's-hunting prey and dispatch..32acp's are the smallest slaughtering guns that are 100%, they have enough penetration energy to get thru brain or thru heart.:cool:

Zundfolge

October 5, 2003, 12:29 AM

Self defense isn't about killing people, it's about stopping them.
That is the essence of all these silly debates.

Clearly a .32 is better then nothing, but after my difficulty knocking down poppers with my Makarov (in 9x18), I'd rather be carrying a larger caliber (although I am stuck carrying it until I can afford something else).

That said, if I had a KelTec P32, I'd probably carry it a lot (especialy at work, where I don't carry now). For many, the .32 is the difference between being armed and not being armed, not the difference between .32 and <insert better defense caliber here>.

On a side note, I seem to remember some FBI crime report saying the .22lr was the most common caliber used in homicides.

Dave R

October 5, 2003, 12:40 AM

The .32 acp is not likely to give you a "one shot stop." I don't care. I'm confident enough that it would give me, say, a 5-7 shot stop.

I think it was Tamara who said a mouse gun needs mouse gun tactics. Empty, run, reload.

Sure, carry more gun if you can. Carry a .32 (or even a .22) if you can't.

Here's how I see it. In 90 % of defensive cases, when the perp sees that the victim is armed, that's the end of the encounter. For the remaining 10%, 7-8 rounds of .32acp would make the difference, especially if properly placed.

tbeb

October 5, 2003, 12:59 AM

I used to carry a .380 ACP pistol for self defense. I feel the .32 ACP is not far behind a .380 ACP. I feel they're about equal with FMJ bullets. I give a slight edge to .380 ACP hollowpoints vs .32 ACP hollowpoints. Any of these will kill.

jarhead

October 5, 2003, 01:21 AM

My philosophy has been that I carry my .32acp SeeCamp... I carry it when I can't carry a gun. Many places something bigger just won't work, so I keep something larger close and keep the .32acp on me... it makes a good gun to let me get to a gun...

Mike Irwin

October 5, 2003, 01:48 AM

"The lack of desire to be shot has absolutely no baring on effectiveness; as demonstrated, that can be applied to anything."

It's not a lack of desire, it just puts the lie to the statements of some individuals that you simply can't kill someone with one of these small caliber firearms.

Their unwillingness to be a backstop puts the lie to their "convictions."

But, does carrying one of thse small caliber handguns an indiciation that the individual is an idiot?

Or is it an indication of his certainty and skill with his chosen firearm?

I really don't want to test the waters to see which it is, quite frankly.

fastbolt

October 5, 2003, 02:11 AM

The .32 caliber pistol has been around for a respectable length of time.

The overall size and dimensions of the cartridge has always seemed to make it a very popular choice when it comes to designing and producing neat little pocket pistols that are reasonably well made and reliably functional. It's been said that it's easier to make a reliable .32 than it is to make a reliable .380 ...

Functional reliability is a primary concern in a defensive pocket pistol, especially one of a diminutive caliber ... and for MY purposes I consider a handgun which shoots a bullet of less than .38 caliber, and weighing less than 110gr, a diminutive caliber ...

When I was a young cop, though, I carried a couple of small pocket pistols and revolvers chambered in .25 & .22LR, as well as a nice little .380 Browning. This lasted until I gained a bit more experience in seeing people shot, reading shooting reports, etc ... Nowadays, .38 Special is my minimum caliber for a defensive weapon in those off-duty situations when I don't "expect" to need to be armed. Otherwise, it's 9mm, .40 S&W, .45 ACP or the occasional .357 magnum.

I wouldn't necessarily criticize someone else's selection of a .32 for a legally concealed & carried defensive pistol, though ...

When my agency was reviewing and rewriting the policy related to personally owned off-duty weapons, it was determined that the minimum caliber allowed was going to be .32, which eliminated some .25 & .22 weapons previously carried by some folks. The same caliber restriction policy was written for Secondary(back-up) duty weapons. I know a guy carries a Seecamp .32 on rare occasions, for very dressy situations, but otherwise carries a Sc/Ti J-frame or 442 for a "minimum caliber" pocket weapon.

I see quite a few folks bring .22's to CCW classes, and one fellow that brought a .22 Short pocket pistol. If I were going to "question" someone's choice of a defensive caliber ... if it were any of my business ... it would be for choosing 25 ACP, .22LR or .22 Short , especially since it's not all that common to see pistols in these calibers function reliably through the short course of fire for the class.

Since my job brings me into a lot of people's homes, yards, property & businesses, and not always expectedly or invited ... and I spend a lot of my off duty time riding around the mountains and along the coast ... I've encountered my fair share of large, aggressive and/or "feral" dogs. At some point in the past, I decided that I wasn't going to carry any caliber that I didn't feel might be reasonably successful if used in "stopping" a large attacking dog ...

When it comes right down to it, though, before I really worried about "caliber", I'd consider it more important to gain a thorough understanding of the applicable laws involving the lawful use of deadly force ... develop SAFE weapon handling, carrying and shooting skills, AND maintain them ... buy as good a quality handgun as I could afford, suitable for MY anticpated needs ... and PRACTICE as often as I could afford. Shooting a firearm is generally considered to be a perishable skill ...

AUTIGER04

October 5, 2003, 03:30 AM

I carry a Kel Tec P32 32acp on a daily basis. If I were afraid that it wouldnt do its job I wouldnt carry it.

ps
Someone mentioned being shot with a BB gun. I have heard of people being shot and killed instantly with a BB/pellet rifles. :eek:

pss
Auburn 28 - Tenn Vols 21
WAR EAGLE!!!!!!!!:neener:

Dilettante

October 5, 2003, 03:52 AM

(Snowdog)
"I don't know what the hell this means" ?
First off, there are no hidden messages to the referenced passage to obfuscate the meaning or otherwise confuse. The meaning should be self-evident.

I am sorry, I thought you were being sarcastic. I think the statement I was reacting to was

If you feel confident using a .32acp for self defense, that should be good enough; leave it at that.
What the heck does it matter what others think if you feel otherwise. They will only offer their opinions if you ask for it.

Sometimes people feel overconfident just because they're carrying a gun, not realizing that they are actually very vulnerable. I thought this is what you were saying.
And of course, I did ask for other peoples' opinions. :)

To clarify:
If you personally feel confident using a .32acp for defense, you should neither feel the need to justify your decision nor seek the opinions of others...
Since I am confident that several holes in someone's face will in the very least end an attack against me, unsolicited dissenting opinions do not affect me, nor should it you.

OK, now I see where you're coming from.

The truth is that I am a new shooter, don't yet own a gun, have never fired a .32, and have never seen someone shot or dressed a bullet wound.

Now maybe you will tell me to get off the computer and go get more instruction and shoot more guns. I wouldn't mind having the excuse. :)

But in the evenings I like to come here for general information.

The magic difference: Caliber, weight, velocity and ulitimately energy...the very things you are uninterested in (yet account for the difference in which you seek).

I was a college physics major; I know how to figure out energy and velocity. I also know there are other factors involved:
Bullet's behavior on impact.
Reliability.
Accuracy.
Shootability (if a gun hurts my wrists when I shoot it, I won't practice as much).
Probably others that I wouldn't think of on my own.

That's why I'm so interested in experience rather than overall formulas.

But it sounds like I'll have to do my own research on this, which is odd, because I thought this would be the obvious place to start the research.

Snowdog

October 5, 2003, 04:54 AM

Not a problem, Dilettante.
When I first announced my purchased of a P32 for occasional carry, I encountered so much negative feedback that I naturally became defensive. I have since learned that there's no point trying to convince others when their philosophy has entrenched them against my point of view. This defensiveness is a time-wasting mechanism in which I was attempting to spare you (as you now know).

BTW, this place is excellent for general information and the latest info on the newest trends and items. However, I've long realized it's best to glean all the information and opinions available, but make the decision on my own.

When you've decided to buy your first handgun, this is as good a place as any for guidance, but be sure you'll receive such a diverse array of opinions as to give you a headache. Good luck with that. :)

My vote goes to a nice S&W or Ruger .38special revolver... but who asked me.

chaim

October 5, 2003, 06:54 AM

eThis, or variations of it, are a recurring theme here (and other gun forums). What is the minimum acceptable caliber? Is X caliber better than Y caliber? etc.

How much of an edge does carrying one caliber give you that you wouldn't have with another?

This is a question that I, and I'm sure many others, think about often.

Fact:
-A bigger caliber will leave a bigger holed
-No handgun bullet will leave that big a hole
-All handguns are not particularly good "manstoppers"

Keep in mind that even with rifles, which are much better at stopping people, a person can take a shot and keep going. If you are into military history like I am you will read about untold numbers of heros who fought on after being wounded. Medal citations are full of stories of guys who took a rifle round, 5 rifle rounds, 10, several machine gun rounds, etc. and kept on going. Many people have similar experiences but don't get medals. Some people get hit and are killed immediately, others drop and stop everything because they know there were hit and know they might die, some get an injury that gives them little choice and they go down. Others get mad, decide to take the enemy with them, don't notice, are so pumped up on adreneline that they can keep going anyway, are insane, etc. In a self defense situation add to that list of possibilities, drugged up, as well.

No caliber is a garauntee.

Given all the tangible and intangible factors needed to stop a bad guy- shot placement, penatration (even good penatrating calibers don't always penatrate and bad ones sometimes do- it is an average we go by), potentially weird bounces off bone a bullet can take, your attacker's state of mind, your attacker's resistance to pain, etc.- I wonder how much the caliber you use actually matters.

I'd be curious about what percent of the time a given caliber actually stops someone. That is the track that Marshall and Sanow used, but their methodology was so bad that their research might be completely useless (and is certainly less than ideal). I'm not sure you can ever really know.

I think what it comes down to is "are you comfortable with your caliber". If yes, keep it. If not, change it. Your confidence is one of the most important "intangibles" that you have some control over. Also, for years many calibers today seen as subpar were considered to be just fine. In the "Old West" untold numbers of cowboys got by just fine with the Colt 1851 Navy .36cal blackpowder revolver (not particularly powerful). Most European police agencies were quite happy with .32 and .380acp for their service pistols for decades. For the first quarter of this century US police forces probably used the .32S&W more than .38spl (and in the same sized guns). John Moses Browning is reported to have considered his .32acp cartridge his favorite. If you like .32acp, it is certainly a decent cartridge with many great guns chambered in it.

Personally, where I fall is that I'd prefer 9mm, .38spl or .380acp as my minimum main gun. However, I'd feel perfectly fine with a .32acp backup and occasional primary. I do feel that .32acp is my minimum and I'm not sure I'd be happy with .22lr or .25acp. However, that isn't really based on anything but my gut feelings (but that really is the best you will be able to get from anyone here).

c_yeager

October 5, 2003, 07:27 AM

I cant remember where i saw the statistic but, i seem to remember that more people have been killed by the .22LR than any other round in civilian (non military) shootings. And it was by a pretty fair margin too. I recall .25 and .32 having pretty respectable numbers too, probably due to the long term popularity of those cartridges in this country. But, still it makes the point that these small pistol rounds can kill quite handily.

Lone_Gunman

October 5, 2003, 09:12 AM

c_yeager, I have seen the same statistic several times as well, 22LR is used in more homicides than any other round.

On another note, I recently watched a show produced by the NRA where they quoted that 99% of all defensive uses of a firearm were cases where the gun was drawn, and then the bad guy ran away. This would work whether a 45 was drawn or a 32. Most of the time, when you pull your gun, the conflict is going to end right then.

To look at it another way, if only 1% of criminals are going to stick around to get shot, and if your 32 is only a 50% stopper, then pulling the gun and firing will give you a statistical chance of 99.5% of stopping whatever attack has been launched against you.

How is that for statistical manipulation? Your 32 just became a 99.5% fight stopper!

The most important rule, it would seem, is to have a gun, any gun.

Gerald McDonald

October 5, 2003, 09:36 AM

Chiam has a very valid point. Bill Hickok and John Wesly Hardin both developed quite a reputation as killers of fellow man and both used for the most part a 36 cal cap and ball that would be about equal to or slightly inferior to a 32 acp. It was their favored weapon. .

Mike Irwin

October 5, 2003, 10:41 AM

People died easier back then, Gerald.

They didn't have all the movies to tell them that they could survive multiple hits by a .44 Mag., which normally would blow their heads CLEAN off... :D

Kentucky Rifle

October 5, 2003, 11:31 AM

And, since Jeff OTMG is at the gunshow in Evansville, I'll carry on with the RBCD Ammunition thing. ALL my .32's, in fact every pistol I own is loaded with RBCD. I've shot a lot of it into corned beef briskits, watermellons, etc... and I've got to say that I was impressed. I realize that not everyone is convinced.
(*Yet. :) )

KR
(Makin' a comeback here. Slow, but sure.)
EDIT: Went to look in my gunsafe. My P32 and my .32 H&R mag revolvers are not loaded with RBCD Ammunition. My P32 is loaded with 73gr Fiocchi FMJ and .32 H&R mag isn't made by RBCD.

Quartus

October 5, 2003, 01:25 PM

Actually, Mike, people DID die easier back then. They didn't have modern surgery and antibiotics. What would be a minor wound today was often fatal then. A few hours or days later.

Of course, just to keep us guessing, there's the cop who died on his way to a hospital after a gunfight even though he wasn't wounded. He THOUGHT he was, and died of fright, basically.

32acp's are the smallest slaughtering guns that are 100%

NO gun is 100%. Weird things happen. Choosing a defensive round is about PROBABILTIES. You should choose the weapon that...

[list=1]
...you can carry. That's why we carry handguns in the first place - it's usually not practical to carry an M-1A or AR-15 all day long. That's why a .22 or a .32 is a MUCH better choice than nothing.

...you can shoot with accurately. A hit with a .22 (or .32) is better than a miss with a .44 mag. That's why for some people, a .32 is a better choice than a .44 mag EVEN WHEN CONCEALMENT IS NOT AN ISSUE.

...will give the greatest PROBABILITY of stopping an attacker or attackers. That means the biggest caliber that meets requirements 1 and 2. Caliber is the last criterion. But it does count. To ignore it is foolish.
[/list=1]

If you'd like to see learn something about wounding, I suggest taking a look at this forensic site. WARNING: The photos there are not pretty. Some of them are pretty bad. I seriously suggest you not look at them close to lunch time. Forget the machismo - this is bad stuff: (http://www.plusp.com/gallery/)

Be sure to read the text that goes with them. I draw your attention in particular to this comment:

"Head wounds are often the most serious, but not always fatal. Those that think headshots are a total solution have little clue about the human anatomy."

Another photo is a CT scan of a head which shows skull fragments driven quite deeply into the brain, causing death. The bullet did not penetrate. However, note the large swelling, which suggests that death was NOT instantaneous.

You may also find these educational. Again, some of these photos are not pretty at all.

http://myweb.absa.co.za/elsdeng/html/gunshot_wounds.html

(They've also got some gun related wallpaper (http://myweb.absa.co.za/elsdeng/html/wallpaper_for_your_desktop.html) - these ARE pretty!)

http://www.firearmsid.com/index.htm

Mike Irwin

October 5, 2003, 03:25 PM

"Actually, Mike, people DID die easier back then."

That I'm aware of, Quartus.

It's no accident that the average life span jumped by nearly 30% from 1930 to 1950.

Penicillin.

chaim

October 5, 2003, 06:54 PM

Actually, Mike, people DID die easier back then. They didn't have modern surgery and antibiotics. What would be a minor wound today was often fatal then. A few hours or days later. Um yeah, but modern medicine doesn't make you any less likely to be stopped by the shot. If I am attacked I don't really care if the BG is killed (well, I do, I'd rather not kill someone but either way that isn't going to be my immediate concern). I will care if I stop them. Shoot them and they live for 5 minutes before dying and they still have time to hurt you too. Shoot them, they collapse but survive and they still don't have a chance to cause you much harm. Again, this isn't really something that modern medicine will impact (however, modern advances in bullets will, and those are made with both large and small caliber chamberings).

chaim

October 5, 2003, 07:06 PM

I cant remember where i saw the statistic but, i seem to remember that more people have been killed by the .22LR than any other round in civilian (non military) shootings. Yes but... I'm not going to basically repeat my last post, but basically that would only really matter if you were an assassin. For self defense the important thing isn't killing someone but quickly putting them out of commission. I'm not saying .22lr won't work, just that we need to keep with relevant criteria.

Keith

October 5, 2003, 07:45 PM

Shooting somebody twice with a .32 would be like shooting them once with a .64...

I'm only half kidding! .32's and .380's make great concealable pocket guns. If the ballistics aren't that great, think of them as multi-shot devices - thats why they have magazines!

Keith

fastbolt

October 5, 2003, 08:08 PM

ALL bullets are dangerous ... and ALL of them CAN cause fatal or serious wounds.

Here's a link that offers some interesting information related to the behavior and wounding effects of smaller calibers upon the body ...
http://64.177.53.248/ubb/Forum78/HTML/000454.html

Also, here's a link to some various firearms info that may be interesting, at least for the historical info, with the link taking you directly to an article written about the .32 ACP. You'll note the reference to Marshall & Sanow statistics, so take it as you will ...
http://www.chuckhawks.com/32ACP.htm

People react anything but consistently when they're wounded by handgun bullets ...

I once had a case where a man had been shot once with a .25 ACP, and the bullet was lodged close to his heart. He certainly seemed in poor shape in the E/R while I was asking him who had shot him ... until he heard I was taking possession of his clothing as evidence, and he realized his pants contained a fair quantity of drugs. He sat right up off the table, yelling that I couldn't take his clothing, and had to be restrained by the E/R staff. Go figure ...

Another time, I was involved in a shooting investigation where a man in very poor health had apparently suffered a gunshot wound to the head. If I remember correctly, the weapon I recovered at the scene was an older S&W revolver chambered in .32 S&W Long. There was significant visible trauma to the head, and the doctor discovered the bullet was lodged at the base of the brain. The man died the next day.

I knew a cop that was once involved in a gunfight off-duty. He was carrying a .25 ACP at the time, and the suspect was apparently carrying a 9mm. Neither of them hit the other during the exchange of gunfire ... but the cop decided to start carrying a larger caliber off-duty weapon afterward ...

What does this sort of anecdotal stuff mean? Nothing ...

Risk assessment is a very personal consideration. There's a wealth of information available nowadays in magazines & books, online, and at training schools & seminars. The trick is to sort through the info and glean what's accurate, useful and relevant for YOUR circumstances and needs ... and this can include what model handgun and caliber would be suitable for YOUR lawful defensive needs.

That other fellow I previously mentioned that sometimes carries his "watch fob" Seecamp .32? Well, he's very fast, and very good with it ...

Gordon

October 5, 2003, 10:13 PM

No handgun bullet will leave that big a hole " - Not true! A black talon or ranger talon(and others) 45acp leaves "a big hole" in everything I shot dead with it! Of course a .44 Mag with 240 or 300 XTP's and others, leaves a big hole . All calibers over .40, WITH PROPER BULLETS, leave "a big hole" of over 1/2" . A big hole thru non vital tissue, of course, ain't as good as a .32 hole thru a vital organ. I don't think all those German's considered their .32 pistols as inadequate to kill people reasonably quickly. Once again a .32acp is NOT a .25 or .22!:)

AUTIGER04

October 6, 2003, 12:18 AM

Oh Man!! Thanks to Quartus. I feel sick.:barf:

Quartus

October 6, 2003, 12:57 AM

Can't say I didn't warn you. It's serious stuff.

Now think about this: Cops get paid to see that stuff BEFORE it's cleaned up. Somewhere, right now, some cop is looking at a mess like that because we asked him to take care of the rough stuff for us.

We don't pay them enough.

Dilettante

October 6, 2003, 02:03 AM

Thanks for the warning Quartus. At least I knew what I was getting into.

There's some stuff you should probably see once in your life. Hopefully that's all I will have to. :)

Mike Irwin

October 6, 2003, 03:26 AM

Some of those photos looked like the chili I had for dinner...

I've gotten way too used to that sort of stuff...

Dilettante

October 6, 2003, 03:55 AM

Sorry to hear it man. Are you medical or LEO?

Mike Irwin

October 6, 2003, 12:27 PM

Neither.

A student of all that is horrible in the world.

sw442642

October 6, 2003, 06:14 PM

The vast majority of defensive gun uses are deterrent. Having a gun is much more important than not.

The stopping power studies on goats and from M&S also don't cover folks who took one round and skeedaddled. That is good from my point of view.

Have the best gun you can reasonably carry and afford. Get some training if you can. That will do most folks more good than the endless drone of you must carry a 1911.

chaim

October 7, 2003, 01:39 AM

No handgun bullet will leave that big a hole " - Not true! A black talon or ranger talon(and others) 45acp leaves "a big hole" in everything I shot dead with it! Well, with a good HP and some luck a .45acp or .44mag might leave up to a 0.60 or 0.70" hole. Considering that the average American male is 5'8"-6' tall and 150-200LBS that isn't that big a hole. Of course any hole is too much if it was to be put into my body, especially considering that a .22" hole can be more than enough sometimes. Certainly, at minimum any will hurt like heck.

The vast majority of defensive gun uses are deterrent. Having a gun is much more important than not. Which is why when possible I would much prefer at least a .380 or 9mm and I'll probably carry the biggest gun I comfortably can (when in a CCW state)- the bigger the gun and the bigger opening the bigger the "oh sh.." quotient.:D

Nobody

October 7, 2003, 11:19 AM

I have full confidence in my .32 to provide adequate defensive capability at close range. Of course, it's a .32 H&R Mag. :D

Kentucky Rifle

October 7, 2003, 11:25 AM

Six cartridges, light recoil in light snubs. Nice.

KR

Nobody

October 7, 2003, 12:02 PM

KR, your constant praise of the S&W .32 snubs is part of what swayed me in that direction. :p

MeatWagon

October 7, 2003, 04:14 PM

"Now think about this: Cops get paid to see that stuff BEFORE it's cleaned up. Somewhere, right now, some cop is looking at a mess like that because we asked him to take care of the rough stuff for us."

Dont forget the Emt/Paramedics that have to "Work" these victims.

Oh yeah Ive heard stories from a veteran Paramedic about a crack dealer that got shot 21 count'em 21 times with 9mm and contiune walking around like he was in "Night of the Living Dead"!

The Creepy Crawlies are everywhere people, be safe!

Quartus

October 7, 2003, 10:19 PM

Yeah, don't think we pay THEM enough, either.

BTW, welcome to THR!

Rebeldon

October 7, 2003, 10:34 PM

.32 ACP will kill deader than dead. It will do wonders if you point it at the attackers groin area. You might get the attacker to back off without having to pull the trigger. Who wants to be shot there?

Stay Low

October 7, 2003, 10:59 PM

If you ever wonder to yourself if a 32 is enough gun, it isn't enough gun. Pick a caliber you a comfortable with. I was in a Stop and Rob once with a 6 round 9mm when 3 kids walked in, acting oddly, that made me nervous. Right then I thought 6 ain't enough. I wanna feel good about what's on my hip.

oldfella

October 8, 2003, 12:13 AM

Interesting topic and conversation, which has been had many times on most gun related boards. Like most of you I carry what I can, depending on dress and the fact that I am a short-fat old man. In the summer months I carry a 32ACP, while in colder months I carry a 38Spcl/357Mag 3" revolver.

I do have a question about 32ACPs: Which would you trust more, a Beretta Tomcat or a Kel-Tec... reliability, etc. Your response will help me decide to keep or to trade. Thanks. The Oldfella

Kentucky Rifle

October 8, 2003, 10:16 AM

Thanks. I'm glad somebody listen's. :)
But the truth is, it was Tamara and Marko who I "copied off". They got these Taurus .32 H&R Mag snubs and put silverwood grips on them and put pictures on THR. Well, I was a goner.
I "HAD" to buy one too. I find that the .32 H&R magnum doesn't hurt my arthritis and is pretty powerful. Plus, I like having the extra round. I've bought two revolvers chambered for .32 mag. It's the only AirLite Ti that I like. (Sorry, AirLite Ti owners. No offense. Being not very sensitive to recoil, I thought an AirLite Ti .357 mag would be fun to shoot. I was wrong. It made my Glock 27 feel like a "BB pistol".) I put these thin, slick walnut grips on my S&W 331 and wear it on my ankle. If I get knocked down or am in my truck, it's a pretty fast draw.

KR

chaim

October 8, 2003, 06:48 PM

KR, your constant endorsement of the .32H&R mag makes me want one too. The only reason I haven't done it yet is that I have not seen much of the ammo around here and the only guns I've seen in it are the SA Ruger Single-Sixes in .32H&R (man I really wanted that gun). I do reload revolver now so it is more likely, but I'd like some factory ammo to compare first. Still, it is coming within a year or two. My future snub list looks like this: Taurus 905 (got to check out the new 9mm snub), .22lr Taurus 94 for cheap and easy practice (maybe in the aluminium UL) though it may jump to first depending on how long it takes for the 905 to come to MD, 731UL. So it is the third of my upcoming snubs (if the 905 takes too long it might be second) and it is your fault!:neener:

Kentucky Rifle

October 9, 2003, 10:51 AM

I'm GLAD it's my fault. :) .32 H&R Mag is a great caliber. In my ankle 331, I have alternating rounds of Magsafe and Ferderal Hi-Shok hollow points. Plus, I've had NO TROUBLE at all finding .32 mag ammunition. I've got it all over the house. I've done what I always do. "Hid it from myself".<dammit> I run across a box or two of .32 Mag (which I've forgotten about) frequently.
My 731UL is a joy to shoot. When the weather changes in Kentucky, it's like "SNAP", it's winter. Or SNAP, it's summer. Two seasons. That's what we've got. When the cold rains of winter come, my arthritis kicks in. I can still go shoot because the Taurus is such a comfortable revolver with which to practice. Nice.

KR

Al Thompson

October 9, 2003, 03:04 PM

For .32 Mag ammo, IIRC, Georgia Arms has some with Gold Dots.

Kentucky Rifle

October 10, 2003, 12:49 PM

RBCD is my favorite defense ammo. However, Gold Dots are second. I'll order some today. I'm glad that I already sent Georgia Arms my "proof of age" documentation.

KR

Doug S

October 11, 2003, 11:14 AM

I know that 32acp is not the best round for self defense, but my P-32 is often with me when I would be unable to carry anything else.

Feanaro

October 11, 2003, 03:03 PM

.32ACP works. Small bullets CAN kill people just as dead. But aren't there better calibers for the job? I wouldn't tell someone not to use a .32 if that's what they had, could conceal, could use best, etc. But if they could conceal a 9mm, a .40S&W or a .45ACP pistol and shoot it well, why not go bigger? But it all comes down to what you prefer. And I prefer bigger bullets myself.

If you enjoyed reading about ".32 isn't a self-defense gun?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!